MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411618163 · doi:10.51847/xt43sjr7i3

10.51847/xT43SJR7i3

2000· article· en· W4411618163 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf-controlPsychologyCognitionClinical psychologyControl (management)Group psychotherapyPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study, the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral group therapy on increasing self-efficacy, self-control and emotional control in adults with ADHD.The population of this study, all subjects had ADHD.Of the 200 active treatment over the center of the 24 people selected randomly and were divided in two groups.The results of analysis of covariance showed that the experimental group compared to the control group in all three measures of self-efficacy, self-control and emotional control, there is significant increase in post-test.Cognitive behavioral group therapy as a helpful intervention in increasing self-efficacy, self-control and control of emotions for patients treated for ADHD can be employed.Keyword: Cognitive-behavioral

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9900.990

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicEducation and Learning InterventionsFrench-language works237,207